Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39161343›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Telemedicine in civil protection: A controlled simulation study for the analysis of patient care.

Anna Müller, Simon Kraus, Robert Arimond, Janosch Kunczik, Rolf Rossaint, Michael Czaplik, Andreas Follmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anna MüllerFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8855-6481
Simon KrausFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Robert ArimondFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Janosch KunczikFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Rolf RossaintFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Michael CzaplikFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Andreas FollmannFaculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: More and more disasters are occurring and there will be an increasing shortage of physicians in the future. Telemedicine could be a solution here to offer medical care despite the lack of physicians in the area of operation. This study analyzes whether telemedicine for lower-qualified paramedics is comparable to conventional disaster medicine. Methods: A simulation study was conducted in which one conventional and two telemedicine groups cared for thermal-traumatically injured in a stressful situation. The telemedicine was conducted on tablets with integrated vital sign monitoring or on smartphones. The physician engagement time, the number of physician contacts, the time for relevant measures and the usage behavior of telemedicine were examined between these groups. Results: One telemedicine group showed significantly fewer patient contacts. This can be attributed to the ongoing consultation in the intervention group with more contacts. There are no significant differences in the relevant measures. Conclusion: Telemedicine is comparable to conventional disaster medicine in civil protection. Due to potential technical failures, it should primarily be used to compensate for the lack of physicians, and training should focus on an exit-strategy in case of a failure of the telemedicine.

Indexed as

civil protectiondisaster medicineTelemedicinetele-paramedictele-physician

Identifiers

PMID39161343
PMCPMC11331573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.